As a general rule, I find the Puritans to be much more concerned about rigorous thinking, and I tend to put their theology a notch or two above the theological comments one finds common in the Church today. I didn’t Google for anything with Puritans as a search criteria, but if Google gives me a link on Puritans commenting on something, I generally find it worth the read. So I posted it.

As for compatibilism – I gave you two direct Biblical references which cannot be understood in any way other than compatibilism. Are you sure the early Christians denied it?

Specifically, do you deny that the Bible is inspired, inerrant and infallible? If you affirm that it is, how do you conclude that the Bible is without error if God gives man libertarian free will? That free will must necessarily be suspended/compromised/directed in an infallible means such that the Bible is produced without error. I say ‘compatibilism’. What say you?

]]>Comment on Ancient Jewish Quotations Regarding “Whole World” by Tonyhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2686/comment-page-1#comment-4119
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 01:54:34 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2686#comment-4119Also the reason why I am putting the comments about free will here is because I couldn’t put comments on the page about early Christians and Calvinism
]]>Comment on Ancient Jewish Quotations Regarding “Whole World” by Tonyhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2686/comment-page-1#comment-4118
Fri, 22 Sep 2017 01:52:36 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2686#comment-4118The article from purtians mind is filled with citations out of context. Also no when we look at their explination of free will it’s libertarian it takes a lot of intellectual dishonesty to assert the early Christians were compatablisits. The Stoics believed in compatablism but the early Christians argued against their beliefs on free will vs determinism.
]]>Comment on Ancient Jewish Quotations Regarding “Whole World” by adminhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2686/comment-page-1#comment-4117
Thu, 21 Sep 2017 22:28:04 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2686#comment-4117Thanks for your feedback, Tony.

In this article, I’m examining ancient Jewish uses of universal language in an attempt to shed light on what John might mean in 2:2. I think the article stands on its own. It should be pointed out that a number of these Jewish sources predate Pentecost by several hundred years, demonstrating a historically consistent use of universal language to describe a specific set of people.

—

Although this article spends no time discussing free will, your comments on the ancient Christians as free willers is worth addressing.

For starters, don’t forget that the ancient Christians were dealing with a flood of Gnostics and Greek philosophies infiltrating the Church. A prevailing philosophical view of the day rejected free will in favor of what we would call “hard determinism”, and much of that was creeping into the church. The Gnostics took this position and used it to claim that individuals were therefore not culpable before God for their actions. The early Christians rejected this view, insisting that we have free will and are therefore culpable for our thoughts and actions. But if you look at their use and explanation of free will, you’ll see that they often did not mean “libertarian free will” (what we usually mean today when we say “free will”), but rather, they meant something very close to what we call “compatibilism” ..something very different from both libertarian free will and hard determinism.
(Paul makes a direct reference to compatibilism in Phil ch 2:12-13, and the doctrine of Inspiration absolutely requires it. So at the end of the day, I can’t help but see that this is a non-negotiable. Much more could be said about this.).

It is beyond the scope of our discussion here to cover the gamut of these issues. But since philosophers and theologians do not agree on what free will is – let alone whether we have it – anyone wishing to enter this discussion should first spend a bit of time learning the sharp differences and nuances between the various kinds of “free will”. Stanford University has an excellent introductory article on the topic (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/), and Wikipedia has a longer article on the same (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will).

I mention all of this to say: most people have no idea about the complexities involved in the discussion of free will, and because of that, anyone brushing all the early Christians comments under one specific kind of Libertarian free will blanket is usually doing themselves a disservice.

Thanks!

]]>Comment on Ancient Jewish Quotations Regarding “Whole World” by Tonyhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2686/comment-page-1#comment-4116
Thu, 21 Sep 2017 17:18:11 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2686#comment-4116Well to suggest that early Christians believed in limited atonement is absurd. Only somebody who was desperate to distort history would make such an assertion. They were all a bunch of free willers who believed salvation could be lost etc….
]]>Comment on Why I Left the Pre-trib Rapture View Behind by adminhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2309/comment-page-1#comment-4061
Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:46:09 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2309#comment-4061Hi Gary,
Thanks so much for your reply.

I’m afraid you may have missed a couple of the details regarding the points I made.

* “The cornerstone of the pre-trib view” is a direct reference to Thessalonians, or rather, the frequent use of 4:17 by pre-tribbers. My point is that the passage makes no reference to where Jesus and the saints will go *after* He meets us in the air. If He goes back up to heaven, then the passage is talking about either a pre-trib or mid-trib event. If He continues on down to the earth, then the passage is talking about a post-trib event. But the passage makes no mention of where He will go – and as such, cannot be used as a proof of any of the 3 views.
John’s 14th chapter has no bearing on the passage since the rapture is not mentioned there, and the reader is given no time-reference with respect to the rapture, tribulation and Second Coming.

* 2 Thess does indeed mention “day of the Lord”, but it does not state whether “day of the Lord” is the rapture, the Great Tribulation or the Second Coming. For every theologian who insists it means one, you can find 3 others who insist it means something else. In either case, Paul himself makes no mention of what “day of the Lord” is. If you try to take the verse in context and link it to the first chapter of the book, it would seem that “day of the Lord” is a reference to the Second Coming (see 1:10). So what Paul is saying is that the Second Coming will not take place until the “falling away” of 2:3. But pre-tribs, mid-tribs and post-tribs all believe that anyway.

* While we’re on Second Thessalonians… What’s a particular challenge for pre-tribbers is that they don’t have a good explanation for 1:5-12. Paul is saying that the Thessalonian church will be on the ground when Jesus comes in blazing glory to deliver justice to His adversaries (ie, Second Coming). If the Thessalonian church is on the ground at the Second Coming, then Paul is describing a post-trib scenario! Because if the church was raptured pre-trib, how could they be on the ground waiting for Christ to relieve them from their adversaries?

[+]It is a clear evidence of God’s righteous judgment that you will be counted worthy of God’s kingdom, for which you also are suffering, since it is righteous for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you and to reward with rest you who are afflicted, along with us. This will take place at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with His powerful angels, (

5 This is evidence of the righteous judgment of God, that you may be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are also suffering— 6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels (ESV)

)

Note that they get their reward of rest **when** Jesus comes in blazing glory, and not 7 years before.

Thanks for considering.

]]>Comment on Why I Left the Pre-trib Rapture View Behind by Gary M Fisherhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2309/comment-page-1#comment-4059
Sat, 08 Jul 2017 12:36:21 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2309#comment-4059You state in point one, “the cornerstone of the pre-trib view, doesn’t say whether Jesus goes up or continues down after gathering His saints in the air”. Jesus made it plain in

14:1 “Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me.2 In my Father’s house are many rooms. If it were not so, would I have told you that I go to prepare a place for you?3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and will take you to myself, that where I am you may be also.4 And you know the way to where I am going.”5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we do not know where you are going. How can we know the way?” 6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.7 If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

8 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” 9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but the Father who dwells in me does his works.11 Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.

12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I am going to the Father.13 Whatever you ask in my name, this I will do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.14 If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.

15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments.16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.

18 “I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you.19 Yet a little while and the world will see me no more, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live.20 In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.21 Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him.”22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to him, “Lord, how is it that you will manifest yourself to us, and not to the world?” 23 Jesus answered him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.24 Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And the word that you hear is not mine but the Father’s who sent me.

25 “These things I have spoken to you while I am still with you.26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.27 Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. Not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your hearts be troubled, neither let them be afraid.28 You heard me say to you, ‘I am going away, and I will come to you.’ If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.29 And now I have told you before it takes place, so that when it does take place you may believe.30 I will no longer talk much with you, for the ruler of this world is coming. He has no claim on me,31 but I do as the Father has commanded me, so that the world may know that I love the Father. Rise, let us go from here. (ESV)

that He goes to prepare a place for us. This answers the question whether up or down.
Point two:

2 not to be quickly shaken in mind or alarmed, either by a spirit or a spoken word, or a letter seeming to be from us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come. 3 Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, (ESV)

]]>Comment on Help Who? by Adminhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2319/comment-page-1#comment-3909
Thu, 26 Jan 2017 08:01:49 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2319#comment-3909I guess you were thinking of this page: http://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2309 ?
]]>Comment on By Nature, Children of Wrath by Timothyhttp://www.linearconcepts.com/archives/2695/comment-page-1#comment-3896
Fri, 13 Jan 2017 01:13:47 +0000http://www.linearconcepts.com/?p=2695#comment-3896What could he mean?

“…By nature children of wrath, even as the rest.” Ephesians, like virtually all of Paul’s writings, was written to the already converted (the “we” in this verse), the saints of God who were chosen by God for salvation by an act of grace, at God’s good pleasure before the foundation of the world…also stated in Ephesians The “rest” makes reference to the unconverted. In this context, the term “nature” would appear to make reference to God’s natural inclination toward’s the human race. Therefore, it appears to me that based on this verse, as well as others in the bible that paint a consistent picture of this theme, it shows God’s natural inclination towards the human race as being one of wrath. I don’t like it, but the bible is consistent in this area. When the bible speaks of God hating Esau in

2 “I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob 3 but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.” (ESV)

some clarity comes to light for why when Paul elaborates. Paul quoted Malachi and stated in

10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” (ESV)

….10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls— 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

So why did God love Jacob? So that God’s purpose in election might stand. Based on understanding the character of God, his whole character as defined by the bible (not just what we may like about the bible or God), it’s a greater curiosity why he loved Jacob. Evidently since we all sinned in Adam, and the sinner’s heart is repugnant to God, that God would choose to love any of us is something to behold, yet He did so from way, way back before the foundation of the world…so His purpose in election might stand. Did I answer anything?? 🙂